Dr. Jeffrey Kripal Explores the Erotic in the Mystical & Religious |369|

I get it! When I heard him say that I had a kind of visceral gut reaction of disgust. Did it come from a micro-tone of his potential approval of this 'fact'?! Or, was he stating something I feel is true, but I don't want to think seriously about if/how/why?

Should we try to unpack it a bit more? I'd love to hear more opinions about it.

There are power positions that are far more clear cut than others, like say a pastor and a child, a teacher and a teen, or a president and an intern. But in some cases should there not be some personal responsibility on the partner/victim? Even in the intern scenario, if s/he's of age and relentlessly pursuing b/c she's obsessed with power say, while certainly the person in power should 'know better' is there not adequate reciprocity in that equation to be deemed simply 'distasteful' rather than 'morally reprehensible'? Is it even possible that the 'pursuer' here might learn a good (necessary?) lesson from the encounter that would not otherwise be learned?

Also, it's interesting to exchange the male/female roles in a scenario and remark how skewed the interpretation becomes. Many folks would say it's fine if it's an attractive older person (especially female) and horny adolescent (especially male)! If the 'partner' doesn't feel like a victim, is s/he indeed still a victim?

And, my most uncomfortable question: Could it be true that those in power should not be expected to be able to curb such desires b/c they go hand-in-hand with power? After all, there is the stereotype of the woman sleeping her way to the top, and might this be a sort of extension of the 'old boys network' only instead of golf they've moved it to the bedroom? Is that not another form of bonding and 'currency'?

So many questions!

Michelle wrote: "Also, it's interesting to exchange the male/female roles in a scenario and remark how skewed the interpretation becomes. Many folks would say it's fine if it's an attractive older person (especially female) and horny adolescent (especially male)! If the 'partner' doesn't feel like a victim, is s/he indeed still a victim?"

This brings to mind the case of Teacher, Mary Kay Latourneau. She spent seven years in jail for her sexual involvement with an under age male student. But strong love trumps civil law, I guess. He was waiting for her when she was finally released.
They married and remained together until May of 2017 at which time they separated. I was saddened. Nothing seems to last, does it?
 
Last edited:
There are power positions that are far more clear cut than others, like say a pastor and a child, a teacher and a teen, or a president and an intern. But in some cases should there not be some personal responsibility on the partner/victim? Even in the intern scenario, if s/he's of age and relentlessly pursuing b/c she's obsessed with power say, while certainly the person in power should 'know better' is there not adequate reciprocity in that equation to be deemed simply 'distasteful' rather than 'morally reprehensible'? Is it even possible that the 'pursuer' here might learn a good (necessary?) lesson from the encounter that would not otherwise be learned?
good points... yeah, a lot to unpack. I find the discussion related to "spiritual teachers" particularly interesting. I think the line is much more clear -- it's just inexcusable. Spirituality is universally about selflessness... hitting on yr devotees is not. I'm leery of those (including Jeff) who seek wiggle-room in this area.
 
"-- anyone who uses a position of power, and especially someone who uses their position as a spiritual authority, to sexually take advantage of someone must be admonished/chastised/rebuked in the strongest and clearest way possible!"

Right on the mark, Alex.
Nowhere in the Gospels of Jesus can I find any mention of the necessity of confessing our sins to anyone but God Himself and from God, asking forgiveness. Maybe this explains the gradual waning in popularity of the sacrament of confession. Has it been what was opening the door and laying out the red carpet for less than honorable clergy to engage in child abuse in the past?
Also Jesus says in: Matthew 23:9 KJV "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." This might help explain why we were not encouraged to read the Bible. It might have raised questions from young inquisitive minds.
Although I've said all this I must add that I think many very good men become Roman Catholic priests. Their only quest is to bring souls to the reality of God and the teaching of Jesus instructions on how to find oneself in His presence at death. To this end I think the Church may now have been considerably, "cleaned up."
there are a lot of examples of this kind of abuse of power outside of Christianity. Lots of cases among Indian gurus traveling to the West.
 
good points... yeah, a lot to unpack. I find the discussion related to "spiritual teachers" particularly interesting. I think the line is much more clear -- it's just inexcusable. Spirituality is universally about selflessness... hitting on yr devotees is not. I'm leery of those (including Jeff) who seek wiggle-room in this area.

What if it is a depressed woman of a certain age who is seducing a youthful spiritual teacher?

Just wondering if it's really true there is no wiggle room. :)
 
I thought Jeff was making a strong point in his allusion to sexuality and spirituality - a point studiously ignored by religions. I read the book he co-authored with Strieber (The Super Natural) and Strieber's sex/revelation accounts are potent. Also Kripal's own experiences in India drove him to dare to think about a topic riddled with distractions in a very clear manner. The real depth of Kripal's insights do seem to be missed. But then Jeff has a calm and scholarly approach to challenging ideas that do not make him popular among people wanting an easier read. You'd expect a Professor of Philosophy and Religion to present a thoughtful and well-researched piece of work, but Jeff adds a capacity for penetrating insight that is, from my experience, not all that common. Jeff was kind enough to send me a provocative little essay entitled The Traumatic Secret which adds trauma to revelatory and initiatory experiences. When we combine the erotic and the traumatic as elements of transformative experiences of a mystical nature there is no intent to relate them to the damaging experiences in the mundane life - rather to arguing that 'awakening' is not necessarily 'sweetness and light' but closer to madness and terror. I can relate to that.

I have found Jeff's works provocative and engaging, and his arguments well-thought through. The pity of his latest book is that it is priced as an academic book, and that will limit its appeal. For me the Kindle version is at AUD$52.45, and I am going to have to pay it. It should be 1/3 that price. But I also have a sneaking suspicion that it still will be worth the price.

I took a gem away from the interview - what I call Kripal's First Rule - "The first rule of trying to say something intelligent is that you don’t say things about something you don’t know anything about." That will be printed out and put up at my work station - mostly as a reminder to myself, but I hope others might also notice it.
 
I thought Jeff was making a strong point in his allusion to sexuality and spirituality - a point studiously ignored by religions. I read the book he co-authored with Strieber (The Super Natural) and Strieber's sex/revelation accounts are potent. Also Kripal's own experiences in India drove him to dare to think about a topic riddled with distractions in a very clear manner. The real depth of Kripal's insights do seem to be missed. But then Jeff has a calm and scholarly approach to challenging ideas that do not make him popular among people wanting an easier read. You'd expect a Professor of Philosophy and Religion to present a thoughtful and well-researched piece of work, but Jeff adds a capacity for penetrating insight that is, from my experience, not all that common. Jeff was kind enough to send me a provocative little essay entitled The Traumatic Secret which adds trauma to revelatory and initiatory experiences. When we combine the erotic and the traumatic as elements of transformative experiences of a mystical nature there is no intent to relate them to the damaging experiences in the mundane life - rather to arguing that 'awakening' is not necessarily 'sweetness and light' but closer to madness and terror. I can relate to that.

I have found Jeff's works provocative and engaging, and his arguments well-thought through. The pity of his latest book is that it is priced as an academic book, and that will limit its appeal. For me the Kindle version is at AUD$52.45, and I am going to have to pay it. It should be 1/3 that price. But I also have a sneaking suspicion that it still will be worth the price.

I took a gem away from the interview - what I call Kripal's First Rule - "The first rule of trying to say something intelligent is that you don’t say things about something you don’t know anything about." That will be printed out and put up at my work station - mostly as a reminder to myself, but I hope others might also notice it.
Thanks for this.

I kind of felt like Alex missed the mark in this interview. So may people get caught up in the "sweetness and light" aspect of NDEs for instance, and dismiss the fact that NDEs can be very frightening experiences. Mystical experiences have a much wider spectrum than most people are willing to acknowledge.

I also don't think Jeff was suggesting that a religious leaders sexually assaulting others is OK. But bad people can have mystical experiences, just like good people can. Bad people can do pretty much anything that good people do. Being bad doesn't negate the fact that they can have mystical experiences. An evil person might cure cancer someday. He/she might do it for the money, for prestige, or for sex (as opposed to purely altruistic motives). But what it comes down to in the end is that a horrible disease now has a cure.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for this.

I kind of felt like Alex missed the mark in this interview. So may people get caught up in the "sweetness and light" aspect of NDEs for instance, and dismiss the fact that NDEs can be very frightening experiences. Mystical experiences have a much wider spectrum than most people are willing to acknowledge.

I also don't think Jeff was suggesting that a religious leaders sexually assaulting others is OK. But bad people can have mystical experiences, just like good people can. Bad people can do pretty much anything that good people do. Being bad doesn't negate the fact that they can have mystical experiences. An evil person might cure cancer someday. He/she might do it for the money, for prestige, or for sex. But what it comes down to in the end is that a horrible disease now has a cure.

I agree with you 100 percent, from my hands or studies of the occult. There is more than love on light, their are different types of entities just like they are different types of species of animals. They could care less about humans and some even hate humans.

Yes there is love and light, but this is a new age dogma that is dangerous, proper precautions should be taken when partaking in even meditation.
Not all your ancestor spirits will like you, deal with it
You can get lost in a "dark" dimension
The afterlife is not always love and light
It can be another journey, reincarnation to earth or other dimension
Its not one or the other its a rich and diverse experience


All this love and light dogma IMO is ripped from the Christ archetypes of western society where everything just ends happily ever after in life/afterlife
 
The theme of eroticism and trauma, including sexual trauma, in relation to transformative experiences is complex. It is easy to go off on reactive tangents. It has to be handled skilfully. The trouble with Jeff's chat with Alex was that the book was wider than that theme, so an actual conversation drawing out the depths would have to be tightly focussed with both interviewer and guest prepared. Jeff has canvassed a wide spectrum of historical accounts demonstrating that eroticism is often implicit in accounts of ecstatic revelation. Does it simply mean that the intensity of an experience leaves us only with the erotic as a serviceable metaphor - even for the celibate - perhaps engaging in an auto-erotic interpretation of divine communion? This does not sit well with some religious authorities.

I had wished that Jeff may have been induced to talk more on his notion of celibate homosexuality at the root of religious experiences for priests. Nuns can become 'brides of Christ' but where does that leave the priest engaging in an equally intense connection? But I acknowledge that its a kind of conversation you need to have prepared for. Maybe Alex can have Jeff back just on this theme?

It would be good to have Strieber in on such a conversation. His account of being 'raped' by what seemed to be a goddess entity is not only harrowing but deeply self-reflective. There are dimensions to the description of that encounter that Strieber could have elaborated on, and a conversation would do that more than a counterpoint text, as in The Super Natural.

There are other dimensions of eroticism and the mystical such as the practise of penile subincision, sometimes including the insertion of a quartz crystal, to be explored to give the theme a better context- cultural and historic. Discussing sexual trauma in a religious context exposes the theme to the risk of seeming to sanction rape as a valid method of enlightenment (I include what is called 'seduction' in this where power and control remains distinctly one-sided). This is an argument used by predatory priests, yogis and other leaders of religious, spiritual and occult groups. It is, as noted above, utterly beyond tolerance, and is plainly a crime. There is no 'protection of office' that can afforded to any offender.

The link between actuality and metaphor in interactions between humans and 'spirits' (or apparent ETs in Strieber's case) brings in complexities of metaphysics and psychology.Is the erotic actual or associative? If we can have Jeff involved in a discussion I know it will be enlightening and rewarding.
 
If there is no beginning and end we could be incarnating forever! Kind of creepy to think about
 
I think this talk gives a more satifying introduction to Jeff's work (than Alex's interview did).

Jeff concludes the video by saying it is always better in the long run to speak secrets than to keep them. From a moral perspective and as support for others who might also have had such things as Incubus or Succubus experiences he is absolutely right. Although the atmosphere in our present philisophical establishment is such as to discard said into the wastebasket of unlikeliness, those who have been there may beg to differ. Some of us may know a bit about so named, "Astral Projection," and if we've had a living girlfriend or boyfriend who was adept at this or had a strong intimate connection with someone who has passed the experiences are quite real. The timing of these liaisons is triggered by the desire thought of the one of the pair still living.

Should such activity be engaged in? Personally, I'd say, "No." In the case of the astral projectionist, he or she runs the risk of an opportunistic malevolent entity entering the body while they are away. This entity may subsequently become instead the visitor of the living partner and take up residence there. The struggle to rid oneself of this possession may require the assistance through prayer of the Father of Spirits better known as God himself. In the case of engagement with a deceased person the living partner is interfering with his or her lover's evolution in the spirit world. (See Theosophy and Spiritism)
 
Last edited:
In the interview you mentioned Gloria Steinem being an operative of the CIA. I watched a video where she discusses this and it sounded to me like she simply received a grant from the CIA. I didn't catch where she became a operative or where the CIA was trying to influence a movement. I'm not sure that receiving a grant from the CIA influenced the movement anymore than say a grant from the Ford Foundation. (Not to defend the CIA or Gloria Steinem).
 
What if it is a depressed woman of a certain age who is seducing a youthful spiritual teacher?

Just wondering if it's really true there is no wiggle room. :)
we all can do some not great stuff... I just don't like reframing as some kind of "spiritual gift." I mean, it may all be part of God's ultimate plan, but I'll bet not :)
 
I thought Jeff was making a strong point in his allusion to sexuality and spirituality - a point studiously ignored by religions.
yeah, I get yr point but a lot of this has to do with the fact that religions are mostly vehicles for social control and power consolidation that just happen to drag along some spiritual truths.

I read the book he co-authored with Strieber (The Super Natural) and Strieber's sex/revelation accounts are potent.
agreed! there's a lot of very weird alien sexual stuff out there that no one has fully processed.

Also Kripal's own experiences in India drove him to dare to think about a topic riddled with distractions in a very clear manner. The real depth of Kripal's insights do seem to be missed. But then Jeff has a calm and scholarly approach to challenging ideas that do not make him popular among people wanting an easier read. You'd expect a Professor of Philosophy and Religion to present a thoughtful and well-researched piece of work, but Jeff adds a capacity for penetrating insight that is, from my experience, not all that common. Jeff was kind enough to send me a provocative little essay entitled The Traumatic Secret which adds trauma to revelatory and initiatory experiences. When we combine the erotic and the traumatic as elements of transformative experiences of a mystical nature there is no intent to relate them to the damaging experiences in the mundane life - rather to arguing that 'awakening' is not necessarily 'sweetness and light' but closer to madness and terror. I can relate to that.
I don't agree with Jeff's take on this quite as much as you do, but I sure acknowledge his brilliance... and his bravery.
 
The link between actuality and metaphor in interactions between humans and 'spirits' (or apparent ETs in Strieber's case) brings in complexities of metaphysics and psychology.Is the erotic actual or associative? If we can have Jeff involved in a discussion I know it will be enlightening and rewarding.
I gotta call total bullshit on this. Jeff Kripal doesn't have an opinion on the recovery of crashed alien craft because he doesn't have a security clearance???? complete silliness!

but the real point (the one he was really dodging) is he's misunderstood Jacques Vallee. Kripal and others have run wild with "UFOs are a consciousness phenomenon" while ignoring all contradictory evidence. Vallee has NOT made a similar mistake.
 
I kind of felt like Alex missed the mark in this interview. So may people get caught up in the "sweetness and light" aspect of NDEs for instance, and dismiss the fact that NDEs can be very frightening experiences. Mystical experiences have a much wider spectrum than most people are willing to acknowledge.
I disagree. the data is overwhelmingly positive re NDE experiences:
Dr. Jeffrey Long's, God and the Afterlife – Science ... - Skeptiko
 
I agree with you 100 percent, from my hands or studies of the occult. There is more than love on light, their are different types of entities just like they are different types of species of animals. They could care less about humans and some even hate humans.

Yes there is love and light, but this is a new age dogma that is dangerous, proper precautions should be taken when partaking in even meditation.
Not all your ancestor spirits will like you, deal with it
You can get lost in a "dark" dimension
The afterlife is not always love and light
It can be another journey, reincarnation to earth or other dimension
Its not one or the other its a rich and diverse experience


All this love and light dogma IMO is ripped from the Christ archetypes of western society where everything just ends happily ever after in life/afterlife
thx for this... interesting point. but I just don't think the #s support this. the actual #s for NDEs (and even the FREE #s for alien abduction
This attorney takes extraterrestrial contact seriously. Now he's helping ...) strongly suggest love and light rule over darkness :)
 
I gotta call total bullshit on this. Jeff Kripal doesn't have an opinion on the recovery of crashed alien craft because he doesn't have a security clearance???? complete silliness!

but the real point (the one he was really dodging) is he's misunderstood Jacques Vallee. Kripal and others have run wild with "UFOs are a consciousness phenomenon" while ignoring all contradictory evidence. Vallee has NOT made a similar mistake.
Why would he dodge the question? Serious question.
 
I had wished that Jeff may have been induced to talk more on his notion of celibate homosexuality at the root of religious experiences for priests. Nuns can become 'brides of Christ' but where does that leave the priest engaging in an equally intense connection? But I acknowledge that its a kind of conversation you need to have prepared for. Maybe Alex can have Jeff back just on this theme?

I agree... there's a lot to unpack... and a lot of directions to take this... but I would suggest that Dr. Kripals strangely non-conspiratorial (given everything he's seen and done) worldview; in combination with his party-line liberalism (I'm truly stunned that he buys into the phony left/right political paradigm) limit him.

for example, if we're gonna really unpack this we have to start with Christianity. Kripal reaches an incredibly painful point of clarity re his personal experience with Christianity, but never really circles back with "ok, since I now know that's all bullshit, let me understand how it works and what purpose it serves."
 
Back
Top